[SmartCat]

Do Karnataka homebuyers really own the land their apartment is built on?
Real estate experts say homebuyers are misinformed that once a property is registered under the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act through a deed of declaration, the property in its entirety stands transferred.
https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/bu...n-8886221.html

Sale deeds mention apartment owners have an undivided share of interest in the title, but land records in the revenue department mention the original landowner. With this technical mismatch in revenue department records, as per our knowledge none of the apartment owners in Karnataka legally own the land

Almost all builders exit the project without registering a conveyance deed, and the land is never transferred to the association. “No association across Karnataka today has the land transferred to them

This becomes a major hurdle when the apartment complex needs to go for redevelopment or reconstruction.

[condor]

Have always assumed that the common share of the land that is mentioned in our sale deed means that I as an apartment owner do actually own a part of the plot. But this is an eye-opener. Let's see what our association says.

[IndieGooner]

I don't own an apartment in Bangalore. However, a friend of mine who does told me once about a 99 year lease thingy i.e. you don't own neither the apartment nor the land but instead has a lease for 99 years at the end of which landowner has the rights to the property. Now, i don't know whether this is a general practice or something specific to his apartment.

[jkrishnakj]

Oh my god! This is quite a scare. I’ve been in the exact same assumption that condor articulates above. This is surely going to lead to something…wait and watch mode now.

[GutsyGibbon]

Originally Posted by condor

Have always assumed that the common share of the land that is mentioned in our sale deed means that I as an apartment owner do actually own a part of the plot. But this is an eye-opener. Let's see what our association says.

I was reading the documents sent to me by Mantri builders, and it specifically stated that the right to add a tower in any of the common areas remained with the builder. On top of this, the right to rebuild any of the existing towers also remained with the builder. I thought it was odd. If the land belonged to the apartment owners, why should they be tied to the same builder - why cant they shop around after 40/50 years.

I have heard that smaller builders with 6 to 8 houses on a plot are transferring the deed/khata to the apartment owners.

[Everlearner]

Karnataka should implement something like deemed conveyance in Maharashtra.

https://www.nobroker.in/blog/deemed-...C17%40AdobeOrg

[saket77]

Originally Posted by SmartCat

Do Karnataka homebuyers really own the land their apartment is built on?
Real estate experts say homebuyers are misinformed that once a property is registered under the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act through a deed of declaration, the property in its entirety stands transferred.

My understanding of the matter is that unless you get the mutation done after getting the flat registered, you don’t get entitlement of the land share. Once you get the mutation done, the land records will show you as the owner of the part land and then it will be your responsibility to pay the taxes for the piece of land you’ll be owning.

This is just a layman’s view and would like to be corrected if I’m wrong.

Regards,
Saket.

[condor]

Originally Posted by saket77

Once you get the mutation done, the land records will show you as the owner of the part land .

I think mutuation would be for agriculutral lands. In case of apartments, the land ownership be transferred from the landowner(s) to the apartment owners association, which in turn can be deemed to be owned by the current owners of the apartments.

[shankar.balan]

Here is a rejoinder by the Bangalore Apartment Federation.
Worth reading.

[fordday]

Originally Posted by GutsyGibbon

I was reading the documents sent to me by Mantri builders, and it specifically stated that the right to add a tower in any of the common areas remained with the builder. On top of this, the right to rebuild any of the existing towers also remained with the builder. I thought it was odd. If the land belonged to the apartment owners, why should they be tied to the same builder - why cant they shop around after 40/50 years.

This is the real danger. The builder or the landlord retains the right to redevelop the land when law favours them. Though the individual flat owners may own the undivided share of land in their name the revenue records will still show the landowner as the owner of the collective parcel of land. This is then open to all sorts of interpretation.

The problem will arise when the building becomes old and goes for redevelopment. At that time who can apply for redevelopment of the land. Flat owners cannot apply individually as they do not own the land collectively as a single parcel, in the records.
Unless the land is conveyed from the landowners to a juristic body like Co-operative society or a company formed by the flat owners, redevelopment cannot be even submitted.

These problems are sorted out in Maharashtra with almost every apartment complex forming a Cooperative Housing Society (CHS). This society owns the land for all official purpose. Here in Karnataka we are left in the lurch.

[Gypsian]

Apartment owners are entitled for undivided share and this has been the norm. I dont think such a protocol would be broken with some other substitute schemes. Even if its the case please stay away from such builders.

[rm_arjuna]

I live in a 30 unit apartment in hyderabad, the builder while handing ovwr the property to association wanted to construct a penthouse for his use in terrace and use the terrace for cellphone tower rental citing some rules. Since we have couple of lawyers as owners they had counter argument and made him give an undertaking of not making any future claims. With bigger builder it is difficult to do the same.

[pathik@2020]

The opening post rightfully mentions that flat owners do not automatically own the land on which their apartment is build - unless land conveyance is completed/transferred to the Co-operative Housing Society. Even in Maharashtra this does not happen on its own even if it is a part of the flat agreement. In most instances the builder takes inordinately long to transfer ownership of land - this is because any additional construction right (FSI in Maharashtra) accrues to the owner aka builder. Recently builders have started with a new practice in Maharashtra whereby they transfer the ownership of only building foot-print land to CHS. Meaning only the exact land on which a building stands whereas they are entitled to hold back transfer of entire land parcel (including common areas/parking etc.) till they have any form construction activity going on. This is easy to do since they can just leave a small part of even a boundary wall incomplete and claim that construction is ongoing. In an apartment complex that I used live in Mumbai the builder has not transferred ownership even after 14 years after handing over flats to owners. RERA was a welcome move but it seems that builders have found loopholes there too.

[charanreddy]

The ownership over property is derived only from the sale deed. If the sale deed mentions you are land owner then you are. The Khata transfer from revenue department is just that. To let the govt know you own the land and to help you pay the relevant taxes. A Khata is not a valid ownership document. Problem is that with out revenue documents it becomes tough to enjoy your land I.e sell it or get a loan or get permission for construction etc.

If you sale deed mentions you own the land and your builder is not transferring the Khata to your name, file a case in civil court and ask the court to direct your builder or transfer Khata to your name.


Bottom line : depends on how the sale deed is drafted as legal rights stem from this document

[Sudipt Dutta]

The apartment association at the time of registration under the act defines in its schedules as to what comprises common property. This common property is transferred to the government in trust which then appoints the association for holding and maintenance. Such land cannot be alienated. There are of course untested areas like parking spaces being allotted on such common property?